Iowa has had a disproportionate influence, particularly in presidential elections.
Iowa primary results are early, and thus establish a trend which leading candidates can then either preserve, or lose.
BUT !!

This year's large crop of GOP candidates are so risk averse; they've done very little to promote their own agenda / platform, and instead hammered Hillary.
Sensible GOP Iowans decided, the candidates have been so "issue free", campaigned so little*, Iowa straw voters didn't have enough upon which to vote.

It's an interesting turn of events.
Sensibly, GOP candidates are trying to avoid the circular firing-squad formation.

But these candidates have lost a valuable political plum here, possibly advantaging the Democrats in so doing.

So what's next for the GOP candidates?
Will they bite the bullet, and actually honestly state their policy positions? Or will they continue this substanceless fiddling?

NOTE:
iirc Senator Obama won Iowa in 2008, setting him on the path to a two term presidency.

* Jeb hasn't even formally announced yet.

Because a lot of the candidates refused to pay for it.

Because Michelle Bachman "won" it last time and look how well she did, not to mention how many decent candidates dropped out after "losing?"

So, why not kill it?
It won't make money, it's not very effective, and can cause problems in who continues to race.

We may see even more such changes happen. Both parties have had problems with internal jockeying for position, and the State parties have been trying to gain influence by playing games with which REAL primary comes first.

They used to like to spread the primaries out, in order to allow the candidates to travel from place to place and stump for votes. But for a long time now, travel has been much easier, and the ability to reach voters through technology instead of live appearances has been increasing in value.

The Straw poll was never really a good idea, since no delegates were involved.

I always thought that the Iowa Straw Poll was a bit corny.

A little known Senator from Illinois won in '08.
Lookit how that turned out.

Perhaps the bigger picture is being missed here.

Many candidates have either announced, or are about to.

Yet what do we know of their policy positions.

We know they don't like Hillary.

What else?

Does Scott Walker want Obama to negotiate for the U.S. with Pacific rim nations on trade?

That's a huge deal! It may help, or hobble us for years or decades to come. Wouldn't you like to know where the candidates stand on these important issues, and why?